Ultimate long term durability revolver

[jetfire]

Super Redhawk. Seriously. Aesthetics aside, it's superior to the Redhawk in any other metric that matters.

Most significantly the lockwork is basically "beefy GP100"

[Totem Polar]

This forum was to a degree built around the study of crazy handgun durability versus round count, but I hesitantly point out that even with your own reloads you’re going to spend about $5-10k on ammo in the process of wearing out a $700 revolver.

So whether it takes one or two revolvers to do that might not actually be a big deal.

There is always that.

[Wondering Beard]

I wonder where the new Python fits in that durability discussion. Colt says they beefed it up but if I remember correctly the Python's main problem was the lock work (I think that's the right word as I'm not terribly knowledgeable about revolvers) going out of time not the strength of the frame.

[TheNewbie]

@Rex G


Did you carry your GP100 in a Safariland 070?

[03RN]

Anecdotally: they killed a lot of people with that gun and it was genuinely well liked by agents.

What was their issued ammo?

[jetfire]

What was their issued ammo?

I am not 100% committed to the accuracy of this, but based on conversations that were mostly had over drinks, I believe it was the 357 Magnum 125 grain SJHP. I do know that BP has always favored light rounds moving fast, which is why when they went to 40 S&W they used a 155 grain round going like Mach 9

[Totem Polar]

I am not 100% committed to the accuracy of this, but based on conversations that were mostly had over drinks, I believe it was the 357 Magnum 125 grain SJHP. I do know that BP has always favored light rounds moving fast, which is why when they went to 40 S&W they used a 155 grain round going like Mach 9

IIRC, after moving on from the various .38 rounds, including the 110 +P+, I believe that the BP standardized on 110 .357 for legacy revolvers (and 115 +P+ 9mm for autos) in the mid 80s, until moving on to the .40 155gr across the board.

But what do I know, I wasn’t there, either.

[Lester Polfus]

This has literally nothing to do with why the GP100 was a 44 Special and not a mag but okay

(and then Jefire said some other stuff)
I mean, in 16,000+ rounds I have never shot a GP100 out of time, and in fact I just recently had my very first one break in a meaningful way. In ~12,000 rounds, I have broken three different S&W revolvers, all during what I would consider "normal levels of shooting and training," for me of course.

(and then Jetfire said some more stuff, and posted a cool picture)

Is the rationale behind not offering the GP100 in .44 Mag the forcing cone?

Could you share what broke on your GP100, and if you don't mind, the Smiths?

[ECVMatt]

For long term durability in a revolver the first thing I am going to look at is the main spring and how this spring imparts energy to the hammer. The Ruger's coil spring and hammer strut are more robust and simpler than the Smith's design.

Next I would look at the frame. I think a one piece frame will be stronger in the long run.

I own Smith's and they are great revolvers but for long term durability the Ruger is what I would choose.

The "hollow" hammer of the Smith is not too inspiring either.

Here is a couple of pix for perspective.

[RJ]

If I was ever off the leash, I’d get one of these in a heartbeat.



This thread is not helping.